Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

[Colonel_Klinck]

Yeah I cba arguing with people who are so sure something will never happen that we can just act with 100% certainty, I'm glad NATO Generals are clear on the risks of nuclear war.

Sure enough that I don't need to cower under the table when Putin throws empty threats around. What happened to those threats when it was made clear that if he used nukes in Ukraine the cost to Russian armed forces would be catastrophic? Even their state propagandas channels admitted their bluff had been called and the West wasn't falling for their nuke sable rattling.

 

[arknor]

What happened to those threats when it was made clear that if he used nukes in Ukraine the cost to Russian armed forces would be catastrophic?

If he dropped a few tactical nukes probably nothing would happen.

what if he nukes a bridge with a tiny nuke?

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

It's the counter to the poster saying nuclear weapons had never been used.They have.

Never been used since MAD has been a thing, as it is now. Obviously that doesn't include the use in Japan.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

If he dropped a few tactical nukes probably nothing would happen.

what if he nukes a bridge with a tiny nuke?

Its been made clear that if he uses nukes there will be consequences. Those consequences being that Russian forces in Ukraine will likely be decimated by Western conventional forces. The Black Sea fleet could also be attacked and sunk if that is where they were launched from. Use of nukes can't be ignored and just given a pass. Putin knows this. Also China has made it clear that is a line that can't be crossed.

 

[Chris Wilson]

Not when other nations had them as well. That is why MAD works. If Japan had had nukes and a way of delivering them to the US do you think the US would have been so keen on nuking them twice? Did I really need to explain that?

Yes, you posted nonsense in stating nuclear weapons have never been used before. they have, to devastating effect, more than once.

 

[bris]

I don't think Putes would need to pay Nige, it's just fash respecting fellow fash.

na these guys have been getting paid from Putin for a long time now.
Putin has a huge network of western stooges. Farage, Galloway, Colonel McGregor, the mad Irish bitch, the list is long. All public figures all with a platform to sew mistrust in the west and make Russia look like the good guys.

No bigger prize than Trump either, you got to hand it to Putler he literally had the president of the United states in his pocket, still does although he is not the president now, but he still has him feeding top secret documents to him.

He took them home for a reason, I wonder if he will ever have to pay for it, probably not. Although the GOP are turning on him so you never know.

 

[LabR@t]

And the proposed use of them in both Korea and Vietnam.
Luckily saner minds prevailed.

Again the otherside didn't have the capacity to retaliate in kind

 

[ubersonic]

It was a big mistake by Zelensky to deny the missile being Ukrainian IMO, nobody is going to blame them for this, but by denying it it does genuine reputational damage.

As I thought it was 100% russian.

Russian/Russia and Soviet/USSR are used by the media as interchangeable terms, even when they aren't and doing so results in misleading info.

When they called it a Russian missile what they meant was it was a Soviet design, as used by most former Soviet states (i.e Ukraine).

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Yes, you posted nonsense in stating nuclear weapons have never been used before. they have, to devastating effect, more than once.

Come on did it really need to be said that I meant in the age of MAD, the age we are in now and why they won't be used?

 

[arknor]

Its been made clear that if he uses nukes there will be consequences. Those consequences being that Russian forces in Ukraine will likely be decimated by Western conventional forces

if he drops a nuke with the yield of a conventional bomb nothing is going to happen, unless it lands on civilians obviously.

 

[LabR@t]

if he drops a nuke with the yield of a conventional bomb nothing is going to happen, unless it lands on civilians obviously.

What's the point in that?

 

[arknor]

What's the point in that?

to deny someone crossing an area?

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

to deny someone crossing an area?

Its pointless. He gains nothing and causes more problems for Russia. Do you think Ukraine will surrender because he used a small tactical nuke?

 

[arknor]

Its pointless. He gains nothing and causes more problems for Russia. Do you think Ukraine will surrender because he used a small tactical nuke?

no but it can stop them passing a choke point and the radiation can clear in a few weeks/months.

look how long the radiation lasted in japan.


If putin has a choice between losing more land or dropping a small nuke what do you think they are going to choose

 

[supafly]

It was a big mistake by Zelensky to deny the missile being Ukrainian IMO, nobody is going to blame them for this, but by denying it it does genuine reputational damage.

What if he is correct?

A few weeks ago a missile was shot at a British Rivet Joint. It was dismissed as an accident. But, since then they have not risked any more 'accidents' by having Rivet Joint escorted by Eurofighters.

Going back a bit, Czech Republic 2014, Nato arms depot was blown up by the two Russian guys who tried to poison the Skripals.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

no but it can stop them passing a choke point and the radiation can clear in a few weeks/months.

look how long the radiation lasted in japan.


If putin has a choice between losing more land or dropping a small nuke what do you think they are going to choose

Do you think all the radiation just sits there? Say he does a 10kt ground burst to really get the radiation to be a problem. What is to stop the winds carrying it over his own troops? Or into Russia or Crimea? Or into Europe?

Japan blasts were 12 and 21 kts but much dirtier than modern weapons.

He gives up the land. You can always retake land, you can't put a nuke back in the bottle after its gone off.

 

[ubersonic]

What if he is correct?.

He isn't.

The missile that landed in Poland doesn't have anything remotely close to the range required to get there from Russian held territory. The only way it could have made it there is by being launched from DEEP inside Ukrainian territory.

This is why Zelensky's attempts at denial are so embarrassing, because nobody will really blame Ukraine for this accident, it's Russia's fault, but by denying it and trying to deflect blame he risks damaging his/Ukraine's reputation

 

[Scougar]

He isn't.

The missile that landed in Poland doesn't have anything remotely close to the range required to get there from Russian held territory. The only way it could have made it there is by being launched from DEEP inside Ukrainian territory.

This is why Zelensky's attempts at denial are so embarrassing, because nobody will really blame Ukraine for this accident, it's Russia's fault, but by denying it and trying to deflect blame he risks damaging his/Ukraine's reputation

Really? reports being that the S300 could reach 400 km, which is EASILY in range of Belarus to have fired it. (Just saying..)

 

[ubersonic]

Really? reports being that the S300 could reach 400 km, which is EASILY in range of Belarus to have fired it. (Just saying..)

While S-300s can be retrofitted to use the new 400km range missiles designed for the S-400, Poland and the USA have been clear that this was an older Soviet type (so 150-200 km max depending on specific model). They probably have access to much better intel than that though hence Biden publicly refuting Zelensky's claims.

 

[Tuppy_Glossop]

Really? reports being that the S300 could reach 400 km, which is EASILY in range of Belarus to have fired it. (Just saying..)

A good percentage of Poland's land-based primary radar will be pointing towards Belarus. Poland wouldn't need US satellite data to confirm or disprove it, unless the radars were accidentally switched off like with MH370

While S-300s can be retrofitted to use the new 400km range missiles designed for the S-400

I was just reading that the S400 40N6 missile has the same range but is not the same missile as the 9M82MV, which was designed specifically for S300V4. Here.